Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CNNW 22
MSNBCW 13
CSPAN 4
FBC 3
CSPAN2 2
KGO (ABC) 2
KPIX (CBS) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
LINKTV 2
KQEH (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 78
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 78 (some duplicates have been removed)
" for al qaeda. remember, the administration said she was working from edited talking points. the question is, who did the editing? today, the senators say that acting director morell told them the fbi did. they say they later heard from the cia that he had quote, misspoken and the cia was, in fact, responsible. so what's going on here? cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly has been working her sources. she's joining us now. suzanne, you just got a statement from the cia. what are they saying? >> reporter: actually, i've gotten this statement from an intelligence official who told me it was in fact the cia that made the changes which is more or less what the intelligence community has been saying from the beginning, that this was a collaborative effort within the intelligence community to get their language straight and that the reasons they were doing it had to do with, as you know, classified sources. i can read you what the u.s. intelligence official has just told me. there were literally just coming in on my phone. there were several valid intelligence and investigatory reasons
it certainly was clear from the beginning that we knew that those with ties to al-qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy, and clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the american people was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely, it was wrong. megyn: joining us now, kelly ayotte, a republican senator from new hampshire who was part of those meetings today and whose sound bite you just heard. senator, welcome back to the program. >> thank you, megyn. megyn: all right, explain that for us, if you would. why are you more troubled today than you were before you met with ambassador rice? >> well, first of all, i appreciated that we had the meeting today, but i will say that up front the acting director of the cia and ambassador rice said that the story about the video and the protests was wrong. in fact, the acting director of the cia said by the 22nd of september they had absolutely confirmed that that was wrong, and so i think the first issue is having gone on every major news network and represented that story that she now admits is wron
from the director of central intelligence agency, that references of al qaeda were taken out for security reasons not for political reasons. do you accept the explanation by ambassador rice? >> i don't believe that the best intelligence assessment on 16, september was that there was a spontaneous event in benghazi based on a video that led to a mob that became a riot. the cia station chief on the day of the attack reported in realtime we're under attack by al qaeda affiliates. the president in libya said on the day of atack -- excuse me on 16, september, al qaeda was involved. we've got drones. released the video. we know what a mob looks like in the mideast. i am increasingly convinced the fbi interviewed the survivors in ramstein, germany, the day after and convinced that the best and current intelligence assessment on 16, september went against the video. the video was a political smoke screen. the actual facts were this was a coordinated preplanned terrorist attack. when the president said on "letterman" we think the video caused this. when he said at the u.n. we won't le
and that there had been al qaeda influence to individuals from other countries that had come in. and that it was premeditated and planned. and i just don't understand why the administration would have susan rice go on television and say that the views essentially of the president of libya just didn't matter. she completely discounted them. that doesn't make sense to me. >> you suggested she was behaving politically. fair enough, if that's the case. what would be the political purpose in denying the role of terrorism in this act, the central role of terrorism, organized terrorism, in the death of ambassador stevens? what would be her purpose politically in that? >> i believe that the administration wanted to portray libya as an unqualified success story. and ambassador rice was one of the chief advocates of our involvement in libya, so arguably had a personal stake in that as -- contrary of the administration to say libya was awash with weapons, that there was a growing al qaeda presence, that there were training camps for islamic extremists, particularly near benghazi. and that
to the salafists and al qaeda, yeah. they are a muslim brotherhood government which is why morsi had the leverage to negotiate the cease-fire. >> mika, a lot of interesting things, talking about foreign policy going on here at home, talking about who the next secretary of state may be, john mccain said, along with lindsey graham and several others, who said they were going to fight susan rice tooth and nail, that sort of changed over the weekend, didn't it? >> that appears to be changing just a tad bit. heilmann, you wrote about it. senator mccain is softening his attacks on u.n. ambassador susan rice after vowing to block her potential nomination as secretary of state. republicans claim ambassador rice deliberately misled the country in the aftermath of the september 11th attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. but rice says that she's not to blame, arguing she relied on the talking points from the intelligence community. although mccain had threatened a senate filibuster earlier this month, he's now open to meeting directly with miss rice. >> is there anything that ambassador rice can do to c
there was clearly counter information that affirmed that this was a terrorist attack orchestrated by an al qaeda affiliated organization. >> by now you know the story. rice intimated a cheesy anti-islam film caused the murderous rampage at the consulate in benghazi, libya. not true. her assertion on several sunday talk shows was okayed by the intelligence community and caused one great big partisan brawl. soon, democrats piled on, accusing republicans of racism. >> susan rice's comments didn't send us to iraq and afghanistan. somebody else's did. but you're not angry with them. i would just say in closing that it is a shame that any time something goes wrong, they pick on women and minorities. i have a real issue with that. >> yet when asked about mccain, rice was conciliatory. >> i have great respect for senator mccain and his service to our country. i always have. and i always will. i do think that some of the statements he made about me have been unfounded. but i look forward to having the opportunity at the appropriate time to discuss all of this with him. >> so, after mccain saying he would
it a spontaneous demonstration sparked by an antimuslim film and did not mention the link to al qaeda. after all this taking on her critics, the republican senators weren't impressed. >> bottom line, i'm more dist b disturbed now than i was before that the 16 september explanation about how four americans died in benghazi, libya, by ambassador rice, i think does not do justice to the reality at the time and in hindsight clearly was completely wrong. >> rice maintains she did nothing wrong. issuing a statement saying we stressed that neither i nor anyone else in the administration intended to mislead the american people at any stage of this process. peter brooks is a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, general wesly clark and, of course, former democratic presidential candidate. senator mccain was asked who do you blame more at this point? ambassador rice or president obama? he says the president is ultimately responsible. do you agree this is no longer about susan rice? she has cleared the air about her name? >> i don't think so. i mean, i'll let the senator speak for himself, i wasn'
denied al qaeda's lead role in the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi that cost the lives of ambassador chris stevens and three others and she did so knowing it was true. well, the man who defeated mccain in the 2008 presidential campaign takes this as a personal shot at him. how will he respond? will he name ambassador rice his new secretary of state to replace hillary clinton? will he meet mccain's challenge head on and send rice up to the capitol to go face-to-face with the enemy? tonight we study the battlefield and the firepower of the two sides in this year-ending fire fight. mccain sure wants this fight, but do his fellow republicans? do they want an older white guy taking on the competence of a young woman of color, a rhodes scholar of solid reputation? most important, what end does the president want for this match of fact and wits? i'm joined by michael o'hanlon of the brookings institution and jonathan landay. the intelligence reporter for mcclatchy newspapers. michael, thank you for this. i want to get to the facts. am i right, is the main charge here coming fr
to al qaeda that individuals with ties to al qaeda were involved. and then yet, went on the sunday show and left a very different impression. let's not forget that on those sunday shows on "meet the press" as well as "face the nation" she also made the statement that al qaeda was decimated. and so it left a misleading impression to the american people. i was also troubled that they knew by the 21st the acting director of the cia said that the information about the reaction to the video and the protest was wrong and that no one corrected it, including ambassador rice, even though she had left that impression on every single network, op every sunday show. that left me very concerned about that as well. >> did she say to you that she had reviewed intelligence specifically about benghazi, that had the additional information? she couldn't say so publicly. had she reviewed that intelligence? did she affirm that to you or are you assuming that she had? >> she did review it. >> so, in other words, she knew better than what you're saying that she knew better? >> yes. that's one of the questions
. the unclassified talking points she used were provided by the cia, were stripped of these references to al qaeda, because the information was classified and couldn't be delivered in public. now, after the meeting, ambassador rice acknowledged those talking points turned out to be incorrect. but that she stressed she and the administration never meant to mislead the american people. and what the senators are saying is, as a cabinet member, ambassador rice is privy to this conflicting information, she should have been more discerning when she went on those talk shows, and that the secretary of state should ambassador rice be nominated needs more independent, not just held to party lines. let's take a listen to what senators graham and ayotte said yesterday after those meetings. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before. >> certainly she misled the american public. i think that she would say that. she'd have to say that. >> now, soledad, ambassador rice is not without her supporters. democrats on the hill say rice's republican critics are still the ones politicizing the benghazi atta
that the obama administration decimated al qaeda. that's something that rubs these republican senators the wrong way. i will tell you what she told them, i'm told, inside the classified briefing this morning, what she meant was it was the core of al qaeda, that's what the obama administration has decimated. but these republican senators think she's lef the impression it's al qaeda in general. last thing i will tell you i was told she did say to the republican senators behind closed doors she regrets saying what she said because she knows it was simply not right. >> where does this go from here? obviously investigating intelligence officials as well, i imagine? >> yes. as i said, the acting director of the cia also in this room. and senators, republicans and democrats, are not thrilled with the information that they got publicly or privately. but the -- what goes on from here more meetings. she's back here, we believe, this afternoon, tomorrow she has a meeting with one senator, bob corker of tennessee, probably others. she's going to make the rounds and she's going to keep trying to persuade sen
senators tuesday it was the fbi that took references to al qaeda out of these unclassified talking points rice used for her tv appearances. but later in the day morell called to say he was wrong. it was actually his agency, the cia. >> i can't help but feel incredibly disappointed that we were told something at 10:00 a.m. that couldn't withstand scrutiny for six hours and that's totally inconsistent with what we were told the day before. we now have five different explanations of who changed the talking points to take out benghazi and four different reasons. this is becoming a joke. >> reporter: it is quite surprising that the acting cia director gave incorrect information on something as politically explosive as the controversial talking points that susan rice used in a meeting with among the administration's chief republican critics. you know, the answer to why he did it according to senators is simply that he misspoke, wolf. >> so a quick question, dana. does that mean michael morell if the president were to nominate him to become the permanent director of the cia he would have problem
the highest ranking administration official to link the attacks with al qaeda. you can see john mccain interview tonight at 6:00 p.m. eastern, only on the fox news channel. >>heather: and now from egypt, a teen member of the muslim brotherhood killed in a deadly attack on the headquarters near cairo. this is the party of the egypt's president morsi face unrest after a decision granting himself sweeping new powers. and now, streaming live from cairo, steve, what can you tell us about his planned meeting on monday with his opponent? >>reporter: there are signs that president morsi is trying to reach out to the opponents and will meet on monday with chief justices here in cairo. judges across the country have gone on strike since president morsi's decrease putting himself above the court. he is trying to reach out to the judges perhaps some time to move toward compromise by the president but talks with the opposition leaders with opposition figures still unlikely. many members of the opposition say there will be no dialogue with president morsi until he revokes the decrease. >>heather
. also this morning, defense secretary leon panetta spelling out the future against al qaeda, while speaking about the september 11th attacks at a washington-based think tank. he praised what's being done but he says there's still a lot of work left to do. >> we know we're going to be smaller. we're going to be leaner. it's a reality of coming out of these wars. but we have to be agile. we have to be deployable. we have to be flexible. and we have to be on the cutting edge of technology. >> panetta also talked about investing in cyberspace, unmanned systems for the future. also, former boxing champ hector macho camacho is recovering this morning, after being shot in his face in his native puerto rico. police say camacho and another man were just sitting in a car when someone opened fire. the second man was killed. the bullet caused damage to two vertebrae in camacho's neck. he is in serious condition but expected to survive. >>> a near-riot caught on camera at a city council meeting in newark, new jersey last night. take a look. listen to this. people there storming the stage after
explained she was using these unclassified talking points which were stripped of references to al qaeda still classified by the intelligence community. so rice used the word extremist. >> extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. >> reporter: a source inside the meeting tells cnn rice admitted to gop senators she was aware of classified information suggesting al qaeda was behind the attack. and yet gop senators point out she still said this publicly. >> we have decimated al qaeda. >> reporter: cnn has also told rice tried to clarify to gop senators that what she meant was al qaeda's core leadership had been decimated. but gop senators argue rice was putting pre-election spin before national security. >> it was unjustified to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obama three weeks before an election. >> reporter: rice did not answer our questions. she did release a statement admitting her talking points "were incorrect in a key respect. there was no protest or demonstration in benghazi. while we certainly wish we had perfect information jus
contradicted that. she also by the way said that al qaeda was disseminated along with ben laden being killed. al qaeda is not disseminated. al qaeda is roaring back in those parts of the middle east. >> bill: isn't she what washington is these day as bureaucrat? she does what she is told. she is a good soldier. she is going to be rewarded by the president with the secretary of state slot because she did his bidding. i think that's what this is, senator. >> i think that may be the view of the president of the united states. but, i think we are all responsible for what we say, particularly in positions of -- positions of responsibility to have all of the facts together before you tell the american people. and, by the way, this is also about the president of the united states who did not tell the people of this country, either did not know or didn't tell people as long as the 25th, two weeks later he was at the u.n., after being on "the view" and letterman saying that they didn't know what -- still saying that this was a hateful video that inspired. >> bill: he still hasn't explained it. he sti
by dr. rice. >> as i understand it, the explanation is that that was being withheld, the al-qaeda involvement was -- that point of the talking points was being withheld for classified reasons, but i also explored didn't you question that because that left, if you were to omit that portion, it leaves a very different impression to the american people and frankly, i didn't get a satisfactory answer to that. >> bill: joining us from washington to react, fox news analyst charles krauthammer. so bigger mess now than it's ever been. here is my assessment based on what happened today. i'm going to go on the record. this is what i think is going to happen and you can tell me if i'm right or wrong in your i think that the white house and the obamaeelection committee, all right, that means david axelrod, basically said that after the murder of the ambassador, they were going to tamp the story down so it didn't intrude on their narrative that the obama administration had decimated al-qaeda. so they ordered dr. rice, the ambassador to the u.n., to go out on the sunday shows and say that the s
they knew and reported internally that the attacks were likely terrorism and an al qaeda affiliated group could be involved. four days later rice gave no hint of that. >> we have no information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned. >> reporter: last week former cia director general petraeus told congress someone in the obama administration removed references to terrorism and al qaeda from his agency's summary. senator john mccain, who has called for a special committee to investigate the matter has led the call to find out who made the changes and why. >> i was on "face the nation" the morning she came on and told that incredible story. and right after it the president of the libyan national assembly said it was al qaeda. we know it was al qaeda. and yet she never changed her story. >> reporter: yesterday rice also spoke to mccain's criticism of her. >> i do think that some of the statements he made about me have been unfounded, but i look forward to having the opportunity at the appropriate time to discuss all of this wi
-made anti-muslim video instead it was planned. we have learned it was a coordinated by al-qaeda affiliates. the intelligence community is responsible for not releasing that information, right way. >>> lawmakers back at work on capitol hill trying to avoid the fiscal cliff. the biggest obstacle to a deal is a pledge of no tax increases of any kind that virtually every elected republican has signed. grover norquist is behind that pledge considered one of the most powerful men in washington and has convinced thousands of republicans to sign the pledge. with fiscal calamity on the horizon some gop lawmakers are changing their tune. >> i will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country. >> president has made clear, he will not sign a bill that extents the bush era tax cuts for those making more than $250,000. >> some republicans open to breaking the say they will do it by closing tax loopholes they say entitlement reform has to be part of the discussion. both sides are counting on negotiators to find common ground. >>> if you have a lot of holiday errands you may want to g
-- have been arrested on charges of plotting to join al qaeda and kill americans overseas. the fbi says three of the suspects were detained in california last week while the fourth was seized in afghanistan. they are accused of planning to meet without, militants to carry out attacks in afghanistan or yemen. dozens of undocumented college students marched tuesday to the office of kansas secretary of state kris kovach to demand he focus on his state level job instead of the anti-immigrant crackdowns across the nation. his credited with the anti- immigrant laws in arizona and alabama and continue to litigate issues related to immigration and other states. on his website, he refers to myself as a "defender of cities and states that fight illegal immigration." secretary of state kobach father lawsuit challenging president obama is deferred action program that provides temporary relief to some undocumented young people. on tuesday, students from kansas and arizona delivered a letter calling on the secretary of state to focus on his state job or resign. a 13-year-old girl was shot and killed
explained she was using unclassified talking points which were stripped of references to al qaeda, still classified by the intelligence community. so rice used the word extremist. >> extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. >> reporter: a source inside the meeting tells cnn rice admitted to gop senators she was aware of classified information suggesting al qaeda was behind the attack, and yet gop senators point out she still said this publicly. >> we have decimated al qaeda. >> reporter: cnn also was told rice tried to clarify to gop senators what she meant was al qaeda's poor leadership has been decimated but gop senators say it is proof rice was putting pre-election spin before national security. >> it was unjustified to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obama three weeks before an election. >> reporter: ambassador rice, what do you say to republicans who say your comments were politically motivated? rice didn't answer our question but admitted her talking points were, quo, incorrect in a key respect. there was no protest or demonstr
interviews saying that the obama administration has decimated al qaeda. what senator ayotte and other senators have said is that was misleading because she knew in a classified way that al qaeda might have been behind it. so that is what one -- two of the reasons why at least senator ayotte said that she is troubled. and she said that she is still not ready to say that she will vote for her. not only that, but she's still -- she still has a threat to block her nomination if susan rice is nominated. >> and is that the end of it, or are there future meetings? is there going to be more consultation, or is that that? >> reporter: no, that is not that. that is the beginning of this for sure. we understand that the ambassador is likely to be back later today for more meetings. ted barrett heard from the republican from tennessee that he has a meeting with susan rice tomorrow. again, just like today's meeting. that was at the request of susan rice. she is definitely making the rounds. she's trying to explain herself. but at least with these three republican senators this morning who were --
-term since the leadership of the hamas believes, like osama bin laden and al qaeda in death and destruction and their charter is to destroy israel. it's difficult to broker a deal with somebody that wants to kill you and they're not changing their charter. the challenge here is how do we make sure the hamas leadership understands that their motivation should be zero, very negative motivation to try and shoot indiscriminate fire on israeli civilians. >> so how far are you prepared to go? if you're saying a cease-fire can't be agreed on if their motivation is anything but zero, how far are you prepared to go and are you prepared for the repercussions based on those actions? >> the idea is, unlike hamas who are trying to kill civilians, we are focused on targeting the leadership. i hope and believe the residents, citizens of gaza will go back to their leaders and say do us a favor, stop shooting israel. we are need to broker maybe a deal, have some quiet. israel is interested in this. i'm sure most residents in gaza are interested. leaders of hamas have to make sure they're not violent against
on benghazi provided to rice, critics say that changes including stripping out word al qaeda and had affect of minimizing roll are terrorism but now went last 24 hours, clap are's officclapper's office saiy reversal and said they were responsible for those changes. and adam shift said, to anyone listening it was clear from general petraeus, and other officials to testified last week, talking points were ammended to protect classified sources of information. and not subject to any political spin, now clapper must explain genesis of the statement about attack which was blamed on this video and a demonstration eye jacked by terrorists. >> i think wha clapper has to sy whether he add vacated the youtube video theory, whether he pressed it on the white house, if so, did he did it at the direction of the white house, that is something we need a lot more testimony bgiven that he is flatly contradicted what he told congress last week. >> reporter:since this reversal, on the statements we've made requests to his office, for comment but our calls have not been returned, lou. lou: catalina, that is a
on those sunday talk shows. why she did not mention al qaeda, not just that -- because we understand now that she didn't mention it because she was told that that was classified and she was given unclassified talking points and that's what she read from. the bigger question they have, we're told, is why she went further and said that the obama administration has decimated al qaeda and whether or not she said that knowing the classified information, which suggested that al qaeda might have been behind or at least an affiliate of al qaeda might have been behind this attack in benghazi. >> it will be an interesting morning on the hill. >> this is ridiculous. first of all, she wasn't secretary of state. you have critics who don't want to mention secretary of state clinton, didn't want to mention petraeus when it came to the cia. and they want to zero in on somebody who frankly was sent out on television who was not even over the ambassador. >> are we seeing here, basically, the end game on this? will this resolve these issues? do we think that basically we're going to expect to see her nomin
has made about her are unfounded. as cbs news reported, the references to al qaeda were removed from rice's unclassified talking points by the intelligence community, not the white house or the state department. exactly who edited out those references is being probed by the senate intelligence committees. rice will meet with the three republican senators in a secure room to discuss classified material. the acting director of the cia, mike morell, will also help rice answer questions in this meeting and others on the hill this week. margaret brennan, cbs news, washington. >>> in egypt, a rally by supporters of president mohamed morsi has been cancelled. overnight anti-government protesters clashed with police in cairo's tahrir square. they plan to press ahead with the demonstration today, demanding that morsi relent on his seizure of near absolute authority. he said the edict was temporary and only granted him limited authority. holly williams is in cairo. do we have any indication of what the president there is going to do? is he going to back down? >> good morning. well, president m
that those with ties to al qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy and clearly the impression that was given was wrong. ambassador rice said today absolutely it was wrong. said't understand the cia clearly that information was wrong and they knew by the 22nd it was wrong yet they have not clear that up with the american people to date including they said this was the reaction to to the video, the attacks. what troubled me also is obviously, the changes made to the unqualified talking points were misleading. just to be clear, when you have a position where you are ambassador to the you knighted nations, you go well beyond -- unitedador to the nations, you go well beyond talking points. in addition to, it is not just the talking collins, but clearly it is her responsibility as an ambassador to the united nations to do much more than that. >> before anyone can make an intelligent and decision, we need to do a lot more. to this date, we do not have the fbi interviews of the survivors from after the attack. we do not have the basic information about what was said about the night of
's certainly clear from the beginning that we knew that those with ties to al qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy. and clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the american people, was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely it was wrong. i don't understand the cia said clearly that that information was wrong. >> dana bash, let me bring you in, senior congressional correspondent, i think i saw you in the crush of reporters earlier today on the hill. set me straight. heading into this closed door meeting, the story was the senators seemed to be -- or john mccain seemed to be backing off some of the criticism of ambassador rice, and in listening to that stakeout and the three senators i'm hearing words like troubled and failed and bad. what happened in the meeting? >> reporter: well, the reason i'm told that they did soften the rhetoric and they did going into this meeting is because susan rice requested a meeting and the senators said that they felt that it was the right thing to do to kind of ease up on her publicly while they were waiting to h
was solely responsible for changes, including stripping out languages about al qaeda. to anyone who is listening, it was clear from general petraeus and others who testified last week that the talking points were amended to protect permission and subject to any political spending. the administration of the attack blamed a video or benghazi being attacked by terrorists. the one james clapper and whether he pressed it on the white house and others in the intelligence community, it is a question of did he do that at the direction of the white house? reporter: they want specifics on this new timeline. comments in response made by lawmakers or calls and e-mails were not responded to. jenna: catherine herridge, thank you so much. jon: the old fiscal cliff is still hanging out there. new perspective on the political implications. the risk for the president as well as democrats if lawmakers do not reach a deal. and it will cost you more to drive over to grandma's house for thanksgiving. plus, it is way beyond your control could make travel even more expensive. all coming up on "happening no
did she say that -- why did she say that -- that al qaeda has been decimated, in her statement here on this program? al qaeda hasn't been decimated. >> they are on the rise, all over iraq. they are training camps, in libbia. they are all over sirria. they are on the rise everywhere in the middle-east. >> eric: could the controversy derail ambassador rice's possible nomination as the next secretary of state? ford and joe, welcome this morning. >> thank you. >> eric: ford, that's your old boss, highly critical of miss rice. she has a long history with the president. do you expect him to nominate her? >> she should get a confrimplation hearing. blaming the intel is a cop-out and the head in the sand defense won't work. why did she allow herself to be a pawn for the administration, when it is clear within hours or a day, erch close to the matter knew it was a terrorist attack, yet, five days later, she went on the sunday shows and said, hey, it's a spontaneous protest, in response to a video. she needs to explain herself. senator mccane's -- mccain's right. susan rice is not the problem
that went to the daily briefing said this was a terrorist attack with groups connected to al qaeda. the others gave a different impression, if not contradicting that. like it was a protest. the person who delivered the talking points was susan rice. she said something that i think republicans believe she knew wasn't true. she said it, she must from known it wasn't true. >> i don't follow that logic for two reasons. why would she know it wasn't true. >> because the classified information at the time contradicted it. >> right. but the point is intelligence contradicts itself all the time. in fact, you have numerous channels of information that are intentional or can both be true, both a terrorist attack and people there because of the movie, which seemed like what was the case. so, if you were given one set of talking points that were classified i don't see why -- do you go back to the cia and say you are contradicting yourself? >> maybe it's the intelligence community here and you want to obscure the fact we know who the terrorists were -- >> this is petraeus' argument at the closed
briefing said this was a terrorist attack with groups connected to al qaeda. and then the up classified talking points gave a very different impression. the person who delivered those talking points was susan rice. she said something republicans believe wasn't true. >> i don't follow that logic. why would she know it wasn't true? and second of all -- >> because the classified information at the time contradicted it. >> right, but the point is, intelligence contradicts itself all the time. in fact, you have numerous channels of intelligence can be both a terrorist attack and people there because of the movie, and so if you were given one set of talking points that are classified and then a litter iteration that are unclassified, do you go back to the cia and say you guys are contradicting yourself? >> maybe it's the intelligence community here, and there are reasons why you would want to obscure the fact that we would know who the terrorists were, if there was -- >> which is petraeus' argument. >> i don't necessarily buy that either. but the point being at the time, the intelligence comm
groups in libya. we did nothing to help them. as a result of that the al qaeda and those affiliated groups have undue influence and the benghazi debacle is a result of that. bill: can we do anything about that when you consider the politics operating internally within these countries? >> in my own mind there is plenty we can do. right now engage in libya and let's get a security force and let's start gaining some control in that country and pushing back on the radicals. let's choose a side on the war taking place in syria and start helping the moderate rebels. even the united kingdom is looking towards doing something like that. why sit on the fence and turn it over to the rad cat islamists and the al qaeda which may be the case. bill: there is a power vacuum in the world. that's clear to see. jack keane, i appreciate your analysis. martha: coming up, a lurid tale of money and murder as a woman goes on trial accused of defriending a jackpot -- befriending a jackpot winner. she conned him out of the money and then she killed them. the drama that's unfolding in court. >> i'm telling y
or not that was even relevant. here's how he responded. >> two embassies were bombed by al qaeda, one simultaneously killing many. senator collins is certainly correct that at the time the ambassador to kenya requested additional security at -- or better security at the embassy because the security at that time was at a very busy intersection, not well-defended against car bombs and the like. as a result of the attacks, the state department produced new stand aurds which basically meant that any new embassy had to be moved back from major intersections or roads. and so, you know, collins is certainly right that this request was made. now, did susan rice not respond to that? i don't think we know the answer to that. was it even susan rice's responsibility? usually this is handled by the diplomatic security bureau which is in charge of these issues and so the fact that she was in charge of africa at the time of the state department may not have much bearing on this issue. we just -- and, you know, obviously she's not responsible for the benghazi security as ambassador of the u.n. we don't really know
, that there are no unanswered questions. the senators saying this morning the acting c.i.a. director morell told them the al-qaeda references were dropped in the c.i.a. talking points at the request of the f.b.i. because the bureau did not want to compromise an ongoing criminal investigation. but late this afternoon, c.i.a. officials called to correct the record, that it was actually them. rice met with senator joe lieberman who asked if she was coached by the add f before her talk hoe appearances. >> she said no, she was not given messaging points at all by the white house prior to her appearance on those sound morning shows. >> so the meeting today did not settle the matter. it certainly is not as far as these republicans are concerned. >> shepard: what's the response from the administration? >> in that written statement, rice who was joined by the acting c.i.a. director on the hill, said, quote, we explained the talking points provided by the intelligence community and the initial assessment upon which they were based were incorrect in the key respect there was no protest or demonstration in benghazi. also at
to do with them. and they are the ones who removed any mention of al qaeda, not the white house. the president defended ambassador rice at his cabinet meeting today. listen. >> susan rice is extraordinary. couldn't be prouder of the job she has done. [ applause ] >> shepard: while the president has not nominated anybody to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. she has said she will not stay on for the second term. but the president has called criticism of ambassador rice outrageous and told her critics to go after him instead. that may be what is happening. catherine herridge in the d.c. newsroom tonight. catherine. >> thank you, shepard. rice has met with six senators, five republicans and one independent so far. she has apparently failed to reassure them that she is a responsible choice for secretary of state and not as one critic said drinking every drop of the administration's kool-aid. >> the president is going to have to make the decision about who he nominates to be secretary of state. hopefully it will be someone that is able to both show independence but have t
, common interests, that the talibans, al qaeda will take over that country. and i think there is very, very important possibility. iraq, same thing. where is iraq going? i think it is high time that u.s. and iran start dialogue on these two strategically important issues. totally neglected and i'm a little upset about that. because what u.s. must swallow is it has to eliminate all talking about regime change in iran. it is up to the iranian people, reform is, the people who like to change the society. it's not united states which should make a regime change. and, of course, therefore, i think establish thematic relations. [inaudible] with switzerland or, wonderful diplomatic, wonderful people, but still, you have to have, take a have the courage to talk to the other guy and try to establish relations. and not send information through newspapers or brussels or other places. it is the u.s. should establish its own direct dialogue. so that's one thing. and the other, the inspections, and i think there is almost too simple to be true. i mean, one should recognize iran's right to enrich, e
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 78 (some duplicates have been removed)